Couldn’t of said it better myself:
It’s by Dr. Barbara Bellar, a motor-scooter-riding animal lover, Army veteran and Republican attorney who’s taking on a massive challenge of the Chicago political machine for a state Senate seat to combat the fiscal insanity in Barack Obama’s adopted home state, which isn’t an easy job, as you might imagine, so she made this hilarious homemade video that captures the colossal stupidity of ObamaCare in one (very long) sentence, like this one.
Support her campaign here.
Meanwhile a great post at The Constitution Club asking a few questions:
Let’s begin with a multiple choice question: If insurance companies are forced to offer health insurance to people with pre-existing conditions, which of the following must occur?
1. People with pre-existing conditions pay higher premiums due to increased risk to the insurers.
2. People without pre-existing conditions pay higher premiums – subsidizing those with pre-existing conditions.
3. The government (taxpayers) subsidizes the premiums of people with pre-existing conditions.
4. Insurance companies bear the cost of the added risk.
Not sure? Let’s try the process of elimination:
Should an accident-prone driver pay the same premiums as does an accident-free driver – especially if being able to do so causes the safe driver’s premiums to increase? (Assume you’re the safe driver.) Should the taxpayers subsidize his accidents? If you were the insurance company, should you be forced to absorb losses because you’re forced to offer the same coverage for the same cost to accident-prone drivers?
Or, this: Should you pay higher premiums for a life insurance policy – because, built into your premium is the cost of your insurer selling life insurance to someone who is terminally ill? Should American taxpayers subsidize the life insurance premiums of terminally ill people? Were this to be a reality – every terminally ill person in the country would buy life insurance before they die, would they not?
If your answer is “Yes!” to these questions, I can’t help you – but thanks for stopping by. If, on the other hand, your answer is “Hell no!” then you obviously not only understand the concept of risk pools – you also understand that wealth redistribution is the cornerstone objective of ObamaCare – whether the ever-disingenuous O will admit it or not. (He won’t.)
It is the ONLY objective of ObamaCare. Hell, even a Democrat business owner knows that:
Democratic Senate candidate Bob Kerrey said Thursday that he hates the employer mandate in the Affordable Care Act and that his own businesses might drop employee insurance and pay the federal fine for doing so if the mandate goes into effect in 2014…
Kerrey said wealthy Americans pay their fair share in taxes. And he said President Barack Obama made a big mistake by not following the recommendations of his own bipartisan budget deficit commission.
“I hate the employer mandate,” Kerrey said. “I think it’s going to have a counterproductive impact. We don’t have any (insured employee) that costs us less than $7,000 (a year), and the fine’s $2,000. We’ll dump ’em off. We won’t call it dumping, we’ll say … ‘Go get it from the exchange.’”
And that is exactly what Obama and his fellow Socialist pals wanted. Business owners sending the masses to government run exchanges.